Kroger's probe may leave some legal, political doubts, but not every scandal needs to end in a courtroom

Attorney General John Kroger's report last week on Portland Mayor Sam Adams provoked a backlash of sorts among politicians and other close followers of public affairs in the city.

As you know, Kroger's five-month probe into Adams' relationship with teenager Beau Breedlove turned up nothing that the attorney general believed he could ethically or successfully prosecute. The investigation looked into whether Adams and Breedlove had sex or other illegal sexual contact before Breedlove turned 18, the age of consent in Oregon; whether Adams committed some kind of official misconduct connected to his relationship with Breedlove; and whether Adams made false statements about the relationship in campaign fundraising materials.

Some of Kroger's new critics are political types who sense they have lost a rare opportunity to get Adams without having to play the kind of hardball in which the mayor remains the local champion. Others just haven't seen evidence in the Kroger report, or any of the supporting material the AG has made public, that a number of intriguing leads were fully explored.

In any case, Kroger's main response in a discussion with the editorial board late last week was that a prosecutor needs something -- anything -- beyond the easily impeached word of a teenager to pursue an indictment.

Even in cases that are usually seen as someone's word against someone else's, there are witnesses, documents or physical evidence backing up one side or the other. Not here.

Kroger also argued that taking the case to a grand jury was problematic, too, partly because he couldn't responsibly do that without better evidence and partly because the consequences of perjury do not typically deter someone who doesn't plan to tell the truth in the first place.

One of the unusual, and welcome, aspects of Kroger's probe has been that he has released a great deal of investigative detail in addition to his formal report. He points out correctly that much of that detail would have been hidden from public view had he taken the case to a secret grand jury. And, while a decision not to indict Joe the Citizen does not necessarily provoke the cynical reaction that the fix was in, the choice not to indict Sam the Mayor always does. Laying out the detail, as Kroger did here, offers at least the possibility that conclusions about the quality and independence of the inquiry will have some basis in fact.

Reactions to the Kroger report also should serve as a reminder that not every public scandal needs to be worked out in court. Certainly it's important to know whether Adams broke the law, but that is not the end of the matter, even if one of the reactions is to suggest that we now drop the whole thing and move on.

No thanks. When Sam Adams was confronted with his reckless behavior during the campaign, he lied. When he thought the coast was clear, Adams said he was sorry and asked the public's forgiveness. That means that this can't be over until the voters get a chance to decide whether they accept the mayor's apology.